masseffectfandomcom-20200222-history
Forum:Consider the Events of Multiplayer As Canon
Voting Support #As proposer. TheUnknown285 (talk) 17:24, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #Agree Garhdo (talk) 17:25, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #It's a fact multiplayer characters were inside a singleplayer DLC, so i see no reason to not see them as canon.--MasterDassJennir (talk) 17:35, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #Tali's no.1 fan (talk) agrees; these conversations, to me, imply the developers themselves consider MP canon. #Avg Man (talk) 18:46, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #Typhoonstorm95 (talk) 19:26, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #Falconeye (talk) 19:30, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #Lksdjf (talk) 19:56, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #--Zxjkl (talk) 22:05, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #Hefe (talk) 13:42, March 13, 2013 (UTC) #Though it might be just an easter egg, it is still a fact. I'm with ya on this one. Phantom Bootie Slap (talk) 17:35, March 13, 2013 (UTC) #Agree, why else would Bioware include those ambient conversations if the multiplayer wasn't canon? -- 22:07, March 13, 2013 (UTC) #Although I can see we might need to get more specific about what can and can't be included, it's clear that there is some MP stuff that deserves to be included.Cattlesquat (talk) 17:08, March 14, 2013 (UTC) Neutral #See Below.--Legionwrex (talk) 19:12, March 12, 2013 (UTC) #Im with Legion of this one.--TW6464 (talk) 14:00, March 13, 2013 (UTC) #See below as well Midnightpiranha (talk) 20:31, March 13, 2013 (UTC) #Would prefer to wait on this until the dust from the DLC settles. -- Commdor (Talk) 19:21, March 14, 2013 (UTC) Against #Lancer1289 (talk) 17:29, March 12, 2013 (UTC) # I hate to agree with lancer, but I just don't think that the entire MP can be called canon --Officer Eddie Lang (talk) 22:12, March 13, 2013 (UTC) Discussion So no against votes allowed huh? Wow... Lancer1289 (talk) 17:29, March 12, 2013 (UTC) :Look, don't assume bad faith. I obviously got mixed up there after fighting with the coding for the better part of 15 minutes. TheUnknown285 (talk) 17:31, March 12, 2013 (UTC) ::How does an attitude there help Lancer? Garhdo (talk) 17:36, March 12, 2013 (UTC) :::(edit conflict)I highly doubt that. There is no code to fight. It can take just under a minute to set up a page like this. It is quite simple and quite self explanatory. Lancer1289 (talk) 17:38, March 12, 2013 (UTC) ::::Not doing it for the first time. The guy made a mistake, give him a break. Garhdo (talk) 17:40, March 12, 2013 (UTC) ::::There is code when you're adding both external and internal links. It was the external link that was tripping me up, by the way, causing the template not to display correctly. TheUnknown285 (talk) 17:51, March 12, 2013 (UTC) Would things mentioned in Bioware blogs relating to MP be added in? Like Operation Overdrive success mentions the return of the Collectors. Here's a link: http://blog.bioware.com/2012/10/09/operation-overdrive-success/. Typhoonstorm95 (talk) 18:52, March 12, 2013 (UTC) :As most of those blogs are written in-universe, as though they were mission briefings and after-action reports I don't see why mention couldn't be made when necessary. We could even archive them in the same manner as the ANN blogs and CDN posts. Garhdo (talk) 19:03, March 12, 2013 (UTC) Perhaps someone could ask BioWare staff (on the BSN or other sites) how multiplayer ties into single-player. There's plenty of links between the two, especially with the Reckoning and Citadel DLCs, but I think it would be good to see what Word of God says at this point and not necessarily at an earlier date. LilyheartsLiara (talk) 19:07, March 12, 2013 (UTC) So to me this is very easy to decide. Does anyone have a link to the supposed BSN post in which Bioware denounces Multiplayer? If so, then I'll vote against. If not, then I'll support.--Legionwrex (talk) 19:14, March 12, 2013 (UTC) : I don't remember said post ever being produced. Even if it were, I would argue that the events of the game supersede whatever was said. TheUnknown285 (talk) 19:16, March 12, 2013 (UTC) :I don't think it's that simple, Legionwrex. People can change their minds; if Bioware said MP isn't canon a while ago, it doesn't necessarily mean they still don't consider it canon when they've later added SP content referring to it. Tali's no.1 fan (talk) 19:46, March 12, 2013 (UTC) :: I agree with this. Not only can they change their minds, but there's also the question of who actually said that. If it was someone not on the writing team, then I would again have to say their view is superseded by what the writers say. Even if it was a writer, you have to remember that ME has several writers, so one may not speak for the majority; the others may say, "No, you're wrong, It is canon." TheUnknown285 (talk) 19:49, March 12, 2013 (UTC) :While I agree with the others here that it wouldn't necessarily matter, I would also like to see this supposed forum post.--Zxjkl (talk) 22:07, March 12, 2013 (UTC) This makes two major things canon; the return of collectors in Mass Effect 3's time period. 2 Volus are capable of biotics. It is not a big leap of logic to then assume that all of MP is canon. However some in game choices are implied as canon if all of MP is taken as canon (outcome of geth-quarian war). Since this is skipped over in the ambient dialogue, everything mentioned in the dialogue can be taken as canon, but not quite ALL of multiplayer. Hence I am voting neutral Midnightpiranha (talk) 20:31, March 13, 2013 (UTC) :What choice are you referring to with regards to the Geth-Quarian War? I'm just going to throw it out there that an asari talks about fighting Reaper-controlled geth, if that means anything. Lksdjf (talk) 01:29, March 14, 2013 (UTC) ::I'm presuming he is referring to the playable geth classes, but that could be explained due to our knowledge of the fractured geth before the Reaper War. As a result perhaps when the majority of the geth joined the Reapers during the quarian attacks, perhaps some decided not to, similar to the Geth Primes that can join you in the story. Garhdo (talk) 11:49, March 14, 2013 (UTC) :Hmm. You make a good point about the quarians and geth. However, I think we're in the clear even then. It's not explicitly stated that either race is completely extinct. Indeed, it's actually the opposite, at least for the quarians. If you look at the codex entry for the Battle of Rannoch. Under "Quarians Destroyed," it says "The quarians' plan to take back their homeworld met with early success, but ultimately led to the near annihilation of their people" (emphasis mine) and later "Some few quarian ships did escape." TheUnknown285 (talk) 18:13, March 14, 2013 (UTC)